HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.28.97 Work Session Minutes
k.--:J.., (. ') ;~I
.~;(_'i ,
COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
7:00 p.m. October 28, 1997
Members Present: Mayor Ristow, Councilmembers Cordes, Fitch, Gamer, and Strachan.
Also Present: City Attorney Grannis, City Administrator Erar, Public Works Director Mann,
Finance Director Roland, Community Development Director Olson and Engineering Consultant
Glen Cook. Various staff members from the City Engineering Consulting Firm of Boonestroo,
Rosene, Anderlik and Associates were also present.
Meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. at the Dakota Electric Cooperative
facility conference room. The topics for the workshop, in order of discussion, were Muncipal
Control of Public Infrastructure in Private Development and the Proposed Code of Ethics
Ordinance.
Municipal Control of Public Infrastructure in Private Development
A visual presentation was made to Council by staff from Boonestroo outlining a variety of issues
associated with the City assuming engineering control of public infrastructure design and
construction in private development. A number of issues were discussed including financial
liability, quality concerns, assumption of risk by the municipality, examples of other
communities that utilize this approach and graphic pictures of infrastructure problems observed
by the City's Engineering Division in a number of private developments.
Upon formal conclusion of the presentation, Council took the opportunity to ask a variety of
questions regarding fmancialliability the City would assume if this approach were used. In
addition, questions concerning developer reaction to this proposed change, the implementation
process, the M.S. 429 Special Assessment process, benefits and problems associated with this
type of construction management approach and, in general, how this new approach would
resolve Council and staff concerns of ensuring quality construction management over the long-
term for the benefit of City residents in these developments.
In response to these concerns, the following information was provided to Council on these
concerns.
The City would assume no additional fmancial risk associated with this approach. Staff could
develop a formula that would help minimize municipal fmancial risk on a sliding scale during
the early stages of private development proposals. In addition, utilizing the M.S. 429 special
assessment process would actually guarantee recovery of engineering and construction costs, and
serve to reduce staff involvement in the collection of unpaid developer invoices. It was pointed
out that a number of other cities, Woodbury, Apple Valley and Rosemount, utilize this approach
very successfully.
While developer reaction to this new approach could be negative, it was pointed out that a
number of developers who currently work in the City also work in other communities where this
~{);
.;....1........-'
approach is used. It was discussed that staff would assume the responsibility and be accountable
for meeting reasonable developer time schedules, and that the City has developed a private
development process that outlines responsibilities of both staff and the developer in the
development process. Ostensibly, this approach would be more efficient, guarantee a high level
of quality control, is developer friendly, and would be more accountable to the end users-the
future residents of the community.
The implementation of this approach would, if approved by Council, be applied towards new
developments, as opposed to existing developments that are nearing final completion.
The ultimate purpose of this approach is to ensure quality control and minimize long-term
municipal risk in the final assumption of the public infrastructure in private developments. It was
stated that the policy objective of this new development approach would be to safeguard the
public interest and minimize future costs and problems to the benefit of future residents as the
final customer.
Upon consideration of the information presented, Council requested that staff develop an
implementation plan to be reviewed at a later date for possible Council adoption. A brief recess
was called.
Proposed Code of Ethics Ordinance
The second topic was introduced by the City Administrator. As the proposed Code of Ethics
ordinance had been presented to Council at an earlier meeting, Council had had an opportunity to
review the ordinance draft and was aware of the major policy issues contained within the
ordinance. The administrator reviewed a change in the proposed ordinance addressing previous
concerns of how elected officials could be removed from office for violating the Code of Ethics.
It was the opinion of the City Attorney and administrator that removal provisions in the
ordinance would be problematic for the City, and should be deleted. It was discussed that state
statute would guide the City in this particular area.
Council reviewed the ordinance and discussed a variety of issues associated with the need for a
local ordinance. Opinions concerning why this ordinance should and should not be considered
were discussed at length. After considerable debate, Councilmember Strachan requested that the
proposed ordinance be placed on the December 1, 1997 Council meeting agenda. In addition,
copies of the proposed ordinance will be distributed to City boards and commissions for review
prior to final Council adoption.
Meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
UJ.~
John F. trar
,
City Administrator